I think this is where the spin and lack of information comes in. As I understand it the rule will be a maximum of 5 DR or loan players in the 17 players selected for any game but no overall limit on the number of players who are dual registered.

Unless there is a also a change to the loan rules I'm not convinced SL clubs will seek to get fringe 1st teamers game time via the loan system, I may be wrong but I'm fairly sure loans currently don't permit recall within the first month.

I based my understanding of 5 DR players plus loanees on an article in the RL Express (8th October2012) written by Tim Carson when he says, "Championship clubs partnered with Super League clubs will not, however,be prevented from recruiting players on loan from elsewhere at the top level".

I am reading that as an addition to the 5 DR players not included in the total of 5. It does need clarification and get all clubs on a level playing field but it just seems to be getting formulated on the hoof!!!

I remember when .............................

"It is impossible not to feel a twinge of sympathy for Workington Town, the fall guys this season for the Super League's determination to retain it's European dimension, in the shape of Paris. While the French have had every assistance to survive, the importance of having a flagship in a heartland area like West Cumbria has been conveniently forgotten." - Dave Hadfield - Independent 25th August 1996.

It's a scandal that the RFL won't let you do something you don't want to do.

Is it just about wanting to moan about how everyone's against Fev ?

Griff how do you know we don't want any DR players? Like old rover says I can only speak for myself I don't know if DP or the BOD would want to bring any in. I just presumed with us using all the salary cap up it wouldn't be possible unless we released someone. Also you say it's a choice not a rule I disagree so your saying if you sell your soul to the devil you get privileges if you don't you don't get any? Not much of a choice realy is it?

Griff how do you know we don't want any DR players? Like old rover says I can only speak for myself I don't know if DP or the BOD would want to bring any in. I just presumed with us using all the salary cap up it wouldn't be possible unless we released someone. Also you say it's a choice not a rule I disagree so your saying if you sell your soul to the devil you get privileges if you don't you don't get any? Not much of a choice realy is it?

If you start using emotive phrases like 'sell your soul to the devil' then you undermine your own argument straight away. Also, I am surprised you do not know what your coach and board of directors want as you seem to know what the RFL and SL (E) know, their motives and their intended outcomes.

If you start using emotive phrases like 'sell your soul to the devil' then you undermine your own argument straight away. Also, I am surprised you do not know what your coach and board of directors want as you seem to know what the RFL and SL (E) know, their motives and their intended outcomes.

The RFL don't care about our league or the league below if you think twinning is the way to go and it's best for your club then fair enough everyone is entitled to their opinion. But I for one would not watch featherstone rovers again if we became a feeder club like yourselves. I would rather be in CC1 fighting relegation than sign up to the twinning situation. I also acknowledge that not everyone will think the same way I do but I do believe the twinning situation is a slow and painfull death for the club you've always loved.

I think we should twin with Cas... they could do with some of our fringe players.

So the new rules are that you can only get dual reg players from your parent club? I dont see a problem in that case... were not twinned, we dont want to be twinned, nor do we want to use dual reg players... so were not missing out.

The RFL don't care about our league or the league below if you think twinning is the way to go and it's best for your club then fair enough everyone is entitled to their opinion. But I for one would not watch featherstone rovers again if we became a feeder club like yourselves. I would rather be in CC1 fighting relegation than sign up to the twinning situation. I also acknowledge that not everyone will think the same way I do but I do believe the twinning situation is a slow and painfull death for the club you've always loved.

Griff how do you know we don't want any DR players? Like old rover says I can only speak for myself I don't know if DP or the BOD would want to bring any in. I just presumed with us using all the salary cap up it wouldn't be possible unless we released someone. Also you say it's a choice not a rule I disagree so your saying if you sell your soul to the devil you get privileges if you don't you don't get any? Not much of a choice realy is it?

TG - and oldrover for that matter - come on. This forum is full of anti-DR, anti-twinning, Fevwillalwaysbeindependent posts.

The reality is - if you really do want a DR player, twin up until he goes back, then end the agreement. What is the problem ? Twinning isn't necessarily forever.

So the new rules are that you can only get dual reg players from your parent club? I dont see a problem in that case... were not twinned, we dont want to be twinned, nor do we want to use dual reg players... so were not missing out..

And since you're obviously well up on this issue can you point me in the direction of the OFFICIAL RFL statement on the rules and regulations of 'twinning'?

I'm sure the notice period will be individually negotiated for each partnership, the inference that there is any notice period for Championship clubs is interesting though. To date all the Champs clubs have publicly insisted that they have no obligations whatsoever, why would you need a notice period on a deal which places no obligation upon you??

The RFL don't care about our league or the league below if you think twinning is the way to go and it's best for your club then fair enough everyone is entitled to their opinion. But I for one would not watch featherstone rovers again if we became a feeder club like yourselves. I would rather be in CC1 fighting relegation than sign up to the twinning situation. I also acknowledge that not everyone will think the same way I do but I do believe the twinning situation is a slow and painfull death for the club you've always loved.

Are we twinning or feeding? Stop changing terminology to suite! I thought you had stopped watching Featherstone Rovers for a much more trivial reason than this anyway.

Please remember that none of 'us' have any say in the decision making that goes on at our clubs, so please stop telling me and others what the RFL and SLE believe.

Oh ok, you seem remarkably well informed of the whole situation as I previously said. And Toy? Explain please.

I've seen Batley's version of the arrangement and the perceived benefits which in JK's opinion will make their partnership the envy of others but strangely I've not seen any statement from Huddersfield about what's in it for them. Why are they providing Batley with expensive private health care, employing extra medical staff, providing expertise on several fronts and offering extensive use of their facilities if they have absolutely no control over team selection? As I said, what's in it for them? It all seems one way and hardly typical of SL's attitude towards the Championship.

Wedding Films For The Discerning by Picture HouseFree Showreel DVD On Request